Every board had at least one tough decision somewhere, but after all the debating who wound up getting which spot? Read on to find out!
We have again determined the All Star Teams for each of the four boards.
The bonus awarded to each All Star Team Member is $300 for each member of the first team the second team $200, and third team $100.
The criteria used to determine these All Stars are a combination (in no particular order) of the below factors (recall also that these decisions do include Playoff Performances unlike the League MVP Award):
1. Number of wins/win percentage, in particular how many wins above 0.500 a particular player happened to be is one of the most important stats.
2. Total Number of Games (four game minimum to be eligible), and in a similar vein what percentage of your team’s matches you played in (those on teams who made the playoffs had an opportunity to play more games so we consider both the straight number and the percentage)
3. Performance Rating (this is mostly used as a comparison when two players have both played a fairly high number of games, as it is much easier to have a very high performance rating in five games than it is in ten)
4. Rating; if a player is lower rated and does well, this leaves extra rating points for the team to use on the other boards and could be very important to a team’s success.
5. Clutch Factor: Did this player come through in crucial situations?
6. Replaceable Factor; do we think that the player’s team would have greatly suffered if that player wasn’t on the team?
7. Did the candidate take a draw for the team when they were likely to win? Did they lose a game they could have easily drawn because the team situation dictated it?
8. Head to Head results versus other candidates
9. Total Number of Blacks
10. Luck factor; did you win because you generally played well or because your opponent made some colossal blunders/oversights?
11. Postseason; did the player’s team make the playoffs, making the player’s performance more important?
————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————-
1st Team: NM David Golub (SEA)
This was not a difficult decision as Golub had a near perfect record over a fairly large number of games, with many instrumental wins along the way, several of which were very critical to Seattle recovering from a tough start to the season and snagging the final playoff spot.
Unlike many of the other strong Board Fours who “graduate” after one season, with Golub’s current rating still making him a very viable Board Four for next season, there will certainly be many watching to see how the 2012 Champions construct their roster for 2015, wondering if they will have to contend with the undisputed top Board Four player from 2014 in that spot once again.
Record: 7.5 / 8 (94%)
Performance Rating: 2499
————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————-
2nd Team: NM Karthik Ramachandran (DAL)
This was also a very easy decision as Ramachandran likewise had a very strong season, scoring plus five, playing in a whopping twelve matches. Add to this his 3-0 record in the playoffs, along with several other important wins, he was a simple choice for the second team behind Golub.
Like Golub, he, as things currently stand, is still a very viable choice for Board Four next season. It’s been debated for several years whether using a very young up and coming player on the bottom board is the best way to succeed in the USCL, a strategy which certainly has its proponents. But Ramachandran and Golub are a clear indication that the strategy of having a more experienced and likely more consistent player on Board Four can pay dividends as well, and it should be interesting to see how the Destiny manage to fit him in their next season’s roster also.
Record: 8.5 / 12 (71%)
Performance Rating: 2372
———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————-
3rd Team: NM Levy Rozman (MAN)
This was probably the closest decision amongst the entirety of the All Stars between Rozman and Aaron Jacobson of New Jersey. Jacobson had the slightly better record and performance rating, but the category which really spoke in his favor was his far lower rating (roughly two hundred and fifty points) which obviously was very valuable to his team, giving them more flexibility on the higher boards, and in some people’s eyes this very well would have given him the nod. What eventually lead us to choose Rozman was in part his higher number of games (seven out of his team’s eleven compared to five out of twelve for Jacobson) and more importantly, in a similar vein as this, his “replaceable factor” as again he played in a much higher percentage of his team’s matches, including the last three of the season while Jacobson did not compete in either playoff match for his team.
All Stars aside, Rozman’s first USCL season was undeniably a great one, with several of his wins being key to Manhattan reeling off four straight wins to end the season and capture the Eastern Division Title. But unlike his two All Star compatriots, with his now much higher rating, his team will almost certainly have to find a slightly different use for him next season, and it’s always intriguing if such players can manage to duplicate their great results in future seasons when they are forced to move up at least one board.
Record: 5.5 / 7 (79%)
Performance Rating: 2465
———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————-
Other Candidates:
As mentioned, Aaron Jacobson (NJ) (4.5 / 5, 2492 Performance) was very close to making it and certainly would have with at least one more played game (with a win or draw in it). But even though this extremely close decision wound up going against him, there can be no debate as to how important his four wins were to New Jersey’s success in helping them make their first trip to the postseason since 2009.
Another close candidate was FM Michael Casella (LA) (6.5 / 9, 2300 Performance) who, like Rozman and Jacobson, also scored plus four and played more games than either of them. However, with the two of them both having faced quite a bit tougher opposition (as shown by the performance ratings in question) and having been on playoff teams (making their results more relevant), we felt they were the better candidates, though Casella likely would have gotten the nod with a half point more. Although he too missed out in a close decision, the Vibe certainly have reason to be optimistic about future seasons should he return, as after a tough 2014, having a very strong Board Four ready to go for future seasons could be a huge weight off their shoulders.
A few others who had strong seasons but not really enough to merit serious consideration against the others were NM Andrew Zheng (BAL) (4.5 / 6, 2349 Performance), NM Qibiao Wang (NY) (3.5 / 5, 2345 Performance), and NM Siddharth Banik (SF) (4.0 / 6, 2305 Performance). All scored at least plus two and had some important wins but none had quite the credentials of those who wound up making it.
Stay tuned as we will announce the All Stars for the other three boards in the upcoming days!